Slashdot Mirror
6 Female Founders Accuse VC Justin Caldbeck of Making Unwanted Advances (techcrunch.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Yesterday The Information reported on allegations made by half a dozen women working in the tech industry who say they have faced unwanted and inappropriate advances from Silicon Valley venture capitalist, Justin Caldbeck, co-founder and managing partner of Binary Capital. The women include Niniane Wang, co-creator of Google Desktop and a prior CTO of Minted; and Susan Ho and Leiti Hsu, co-founders of Journy, a travel planning and booking service. The Information also talked to three other women who said Caldbeck made inappropriate advances to them. It says these women did not want their names disclosed for fear of retaliation from the VC -- and because of wider concerns they might suffer a backlash from men in the industry who don't see inappropriate advances as a problem. Among the allegations made to The Information are that Caldbeck sent explicit text messages to women; that Caldbeck sent messages in the middle of the night suggesting meeting up; that Caldbeck suggested going to a hotel bedroom during a meeting; that Caldbeck made a proposition about having an open relationship; and that Caldbeck grabbed a woman's thigh under the table of a bar during a meeting. Several of the women reported finding Caldbeck's advances so awkward they gave up on continued dealings with him. In Caldbeck's initial statement, he "strongly" denied the allegations and claimed: "I have always enjoyed respectful relationships with female founders, business partners, and investors." However, in response to The Information's story, his tone changed significantly: "Obviously, I am deeply disturbed by these allegations. While significant context is missing from the incidents reported by The Information, I deeply regret ever causing anyone to feel uncomfortable. The fact is that I have been privileged to have worked with female entrepreneurs throughout my career and I sincerely apologize to anyone who I made uncomfortable by my actions. There's no denying this is an issue in the venture community, and I hate that my behavior has contributed to it." Caldbeck has since released a full statement to Axios, where he says he "will be taking an indefinite leave of absence from Binary Capital..."
If there's something to this, then they should report this to the cops instead of broadcasting massive smear campaigns. Oh right, filing false reports is illegal so they resort to this instead.
Feminists just don't want women to have to be held accountable for the truth. So much for equality.
why is this random person newsworthy? oh, he's not, it's just a blog based smear campaign sponsored by slashdot. nice.
This news is:
Probably largely true,
probably what he did isn't illegal (just awkward),
and he's probably already been punished by his company.
tbh there's no reason to publicize anyone in this story, the situation's been handled. Let people move on with their lives.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
The women include Niniane Wang, co-creator of Google Desktop and a prior CTO of Minted; and Susan Ho and Leiti Hsu...
*only applies if you're unattractive and/or lawsuit-vulnerable.
Either you accuse with your name attached or your accusations may as well be fictitious.
Any competent attorney will make very short work of those anonymous accusers.
What I do see is that the three who are named are Asian. Anyone with experience of Asian cultures would know to take their accusations with a very large bag of salt. As in : don't trust them or their accusations, and in the absence of proof it's just a "he said / she said" which the court is likely to throw out with extreme prejudice.
A chiropractor article? Random articles about texting and driving? this is pure click bait for trolls and as a dedicated slashdot troll I fuckin love it but it's still the wrong way to go, trolling is less fun when the articles are not set up to get the true believers talking about how great Linux is or whatever
Trump's an idiot but brighter than his voters.
3 comments, all critical of the women for complaining. So you're all okay with sexual harassment and discrimination by sex when it happens to women. You guys are like a broken AI - predictable responses that could be churned out by a bot. Or just cut-n-paste whole threads from previous discussions, because it's always the same, whether it's about pay, sexual harassment, discrimination in its many forms - and then you wonder why your cubby-farm mates are almost all dudes.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
so often blame others than themselves. We recently finished a round of due diligence with Summit, and our female cofounder blamed sexism instead of the fact that we don't have a plan to ever become profitable. As long as you don't recognized problems, you can't fix them.
He didn't abuse his position as employer because he's not their employer. He's a guy making passes at women, and they reject him. Any inability to handle the social awkwardness of that is their issue to be dealt with by them getting a thicker skin.
But then this is just whineyness here. They're not actually doing anything except complaining about his annoying passes at them. The equivalent of telling the wife about a husbands infidelities. So he should also shake it off as socially awkward.
Have you ever made a pass at a women and she's rejected? Has the subsequent relationship been very very awkward. The answer is yes for every man in the world.
Don't hire women. Don't go into business with women. Do not fucking ASSOCIATE with women without written fucking consent for sex in advance.
TBH, the Muslims are right. Women who go around outside without a male chaperon should be stoned to death.
What the fuck is that supposed to mean? "I accuse you of not being wanted...by me."
Sexual harassment is a thing.
Sexual molestation is a thing.
Sexual assault is a thing.
Is "unwanted advances" supposed be a thing?
I don't know what he did, but if it was wrong, they should rephrase because "unwanted advances" makes it sound like all he did was make a pass at them and get shot down.
I had a co-worker get fired for
He: "Would you like to have dinner?
She: "No."
He: "Oh. Ok. Thank you."
Very respectfully delivered - by that I mean the "Thank you" wasn't sarcastic. I didn't think that was at all inappropriate but HR took a dim view of it. They were the same level, not management to a subordinate. (An HR person was in the same room when this happened, she didn't report it.)
Now, in this case, things were quite inappropriate in my view, and I only wish one of them had been like an old girl friend of mine, 5' nothin, 100 pounds soaking wet, and a sixth dyne belt. Not sure what she would have done, but she did have quite a temper on her.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
The women include Niniane Wang, co-creator of Google Desktop and a prior CTO of Minted; and Susan Ho and Leiti Hsu, co-founders of Journy, a travel planning and booking service.
Guess we can see where Mr Caldbeck's tastes run.
...I mean the average woman attracted to tech work is probably about the same as the average man, so not the best looker in the room...
Oh, wait, the women are all Asian.
Carry on, then.
"unequal-power relationship"
NONE of them have accused him of abusing his VC relationship (the "unequal power relationship") to demand sex with them, they're accusing him of simply making unwanted passes.
Which is fine. Socially awkward, but fine.
He tried, he failed, the attempt was socially awkward for them. They complain, the complaining situation is awkward for him.
And? Where do you fit into this relationship attempt? Nowhere. It's between him and them, not you.
Unwanted advances are creepy.
Right?
Without the founder and his money, they likely won't make it to earnings season.
It's because of women.
... from TFA:
On the latter point you only have to look at recent goings on at a company like Uber [and this] to understand where such concerns are coming from.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
You banned us from taking female children as wives over 100 years ago the second you gained political power.
You expect us to be you ally?
Maybe a good 'better-a-millstone' right thinking christian protestant man...
But Susan Ho was definitely asking for it.
"it was an abuse of his position"
You don't get to define that.
The law defines that.
Outside of the law, there are employee behavior rules that define that.
Outside of employee rules, there are social norms that define that.
The social norm for men and women is sexual, due to hormones that drive reproduction. It's the basic state of men and women.
They rejected him, its awkward for them and him, you have no place in that.
Your Honor, I was suffering from a terrible case of Yellow Fever!!
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Watching the Silicon Valley startup scene is like watching a bunch of immature, wealthy high school kids: incapable of dealing with their sexuality, incapable of relating to each other professionally or personally, throwing temper tantrums, and running to mommy and daddy when things don't go the way they want to.
I guess the saving grace is that, at this rate, they aren't going to reproduce much.
when he first started some overly ambitious women fucked him for capital, and then he started expecting it. this is usually how these guys get these weird entitled ideas. doesn't excuse it, just saying from my own experience, some women will fuck you hoping to get favors, and if you're young and naive you don't handle it properly. no excusing him though, anyone with a basic education knows this is unacceptable.
If he really did it I won't defend him, but I'm damned suspicious of people who make allegations into a media circus instead of handling it in court, directly, for the very reason that they're going to media and not court. I won't defend anyone pushing subordinates for sex or other creepy behaviors like that, but I do want the matter to be settled in court before we start condemning anyone publicly.
I don't trust the court of popular opinion, I'd rather these things be handled in a real courtroom, without the media circus.
Women out of tech NOW! America needs loving wives and mothers, not yet more filthy self-serving corporate tools.
Justin Caldbeck is the VC (or was) of Binary Capital. They have investments into huge companies like Twitter, Instagram, and Snap Chat. One of these things is not like the other. Instagram. It is now owned by Facebook but wasn't when they invested. These women shouldn't have waited and I think it's a tactic to destroy competition. I would like to know who whispered into their ear to give them the "courage" to say something. http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/08/snapchat-ipo-facebook-twitter-markets-investors-web-summit.html. Facebook wants them to recoup their loss by selling their shares with what they have. They've tried everything to compete with Snap Chat since they won't sell to them and have failed miserably. The only thing left to do is discredit who they can. https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/01/binary-capital/.
Who knew there were so many women founders in tech!? According to the NY Times the tech industry is just a bunch of white frat bros doing keg stands and playing foozball.
This is why we can't have more women in STEM!
We could probably use some training on this. Judgement of your own actions isn't easy especially in an area that you aren't good at. A lot of guys that cross the line in dating don't intend to and don't know they are doing it until they are called out. If this is the case here I actually respect the guy for admitting what he did was wrong instead of denying it or arguing it wasn't wrong. Asking a coworker out even your boss isn't wrong as long as it is done with out putting pressure on the other person.* Men need to know when they are pressing a woman to hard or using any form of power over a woman. (yes, I'm generalizing). And women, definitely need to know when they are acting like a herd, and pushing each other to do ever more and more harassing things to some guy they have collectively decided to victimize.
*I have a friend who is marrying her old boss and she's thrilled. She tall, beautiful and crazy strong, so most men are terrified of her.
Corporate espionage strategists have found a weakness in the public mindset that they harp on whenever they get the chance.
Just stir up a "women's rights" fervor and watch as companies defying the status quo crumble.
Standing by to be modded down by the naive bleeding hearts who love gossip more than rational thought.
Advances are always unwanted. ... go on.
Advances are made in order to know whether the other party is available and willing to
Maybe you meant "unexpected", "unsolicited" or "unpleasant".
But not "unwanted"!
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
...an advance was unwanted until you actually make it? I don't know about you, but the rest of us never get a note from a woman that says "make an advance on me."
It seems like the only people who get accused of this sort of thing publicly are very rich, straight males; CEOs and VCs.
First, the dude admitted it. Second, only white males? I'm sure that Crosby chap got accused of much worse recently.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
First, the dude admitted it.
Did he admit that the claims of the women were true? The answer is no, he didn't.
Why are you lying? How come you and Barbara are lying about it? My guess is that you just read Barbara's comments where He lied, and are now just repeating it, because the truth isnt part of your agenda today. You agenda is your personal appearance.
Guess what... you just became uglier.
"His name was James Damore."
Why are you lying? How come you and Barbara are lying about it?
your a moran
My guess is that you just read Barbara's comments where He lied,
Barbara's not a dude. The clue is in the name.
Anyway here's something for you:
https://techcrunch.com/2017/06...
Caldbeck says:
The past 24 hours have been the darkest of my life. I have made many mistakes over the course of my career, some of which were brought to light this week. To say I'm sorry about my behavior is a categorical understatement. Still, I need to say it: I am so, so sorry.
So yeah, he apologised for the stuff he did, so why are you denying his apology? What right do you have to speak for him?
Guess what... you just became uglier.
nah brah I'm ripped and beach ready
SJW n. One who posts facts.
What I don't see a problem with is two people misunderstanding what the other thinks is going on and one doing something that the other thinks inappropriate.
Once you've said "Don't do that", then there is no misunderstanding. Unless you didn't mean "don't do that" when you said it, in which case that was not appropriate. But either ignoring the request or making a false request is a problem.
But if you don't say "Don't do that" because you're worried that you'll lose a deal, then the problem is at the very least a large part your fault. By not saying that so you get the VC capital you're just making sexual advances part of the deal and every time one is accepted in silence you make it a VALID CLAIM that sex is part of the deal. It doesn't make their abuse of power any more right, but it DOES mean you can't say it's their fault you accepted the advances, YOU DECIDED TO DO THAT.
It's the same goddamned problem with violent rhetoric or religious violence: if you excuse the violence that seems catalyzed by some rhetorician's speech as not being that pulpit pundit's fault, you ensure it can keep going and you make it easier for those who don't know they're in the wrong to deceive themselves and give cover to those who know what they're doing. Pointing it out may anger some "moderates", but it removes the cover from the problem and it's harder to deceive yourself about it and harder to falsely project your innocence to others and the problem erodes over time.
The guy just loves Asian pussy give him a break
But MOST likely to be berated by them.
Because if you don't get the unwritten rules of social interaction because of a mental development oddity that puts you on the autistic spectrum, you will most likely ask someone you're attracted to something that the other person thought they had "clearly indicated" by subtext was unwarranted.
Indeed the SJW effect, such as it is, is based on the opposite: the belief that the clues you so clearly "see" as being indicative MUST be seen by everyone else. You empathise with others on subtext easily. Which means you project your own internal thoughts and conclusions onto others easily and never once question this assertion, unlike an autistic or aspergers sufferer. And when you "feel" that someone is wrong, you immediately start empathising what wrongness they must be thinking to do what you yourself would not do. YOU are not a bad person, you would not do this, therefore doing this is what a BAD person does, therefore THEY are a bad person. So now you look for subtexts that indicate exactly how right you are.
Whereas someone in ASD would not know how it works inside someone else's head and would either be confused, take it all on surface observable appearance and actual explicit text, or would FUCKING ASK.
And it may be that asking (getting solid data) before making a conclusion that makes the prevalence of ASD among the STEM group so much higher than in other human areas of endeavour.
Moreover, it could therefore be easily explained that if you push someone into STEM, they will be less likely than "normal" for a STEM graduate/employee to be on the ASD spectrum and would, primed with "there's a lot of sexism in STEM" to SEE sexism there far more than someone of the same sex who already wanted to be there and therefore likely an aspie or similar. Because that latter person would have ASKED before coming to a conclusion. Instead of just empathising one into existence.
"Barbara" is a dude. A dude that likes getting fucked by other dudes.
There's a name for that, right ?
M: Hey, I find you attractive and would like to get to know you better. Would you like to go on a date sometime?
W: No, no thank you. I'm not interested.
M: OK .....time passes....
W: I was threatened and intimidated by his "Power" boo-hoo. Somebody pwotect me fwum da big bad man!
And men will tell women in power that they are making inappropriate sexual advances.
I can't wait to try on the whole shoe store.
I am so happy I left America and you weakling coward beta male sissys. You've bent over so far for the whacko left you don't even have any idea what it means to be masculine anymore or the how a proper man/woman roles must work.
The type of relationships where the man stays secure in his responsible dominant role to produce a family and help secure the community have been destroyed. No surprise western society HAS fallen apart and birthrates are in the toilet. The state has replaced the family. The policeman has replaced the father. And men must yield decisions to women, creatures that left without male guidance often fall succumb to their illogical, emotional, manipulative ways. Take a look at a trailer park to see failed women and men. Now the US and Canada have become national trailer park.
To bad most will not be able to figure out this is not a troll.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
There are a lot of professional business situations where I don't need to spell out that something is inappropriate. There is a context and you should be aware of that context and behave appropriately without being prompted to do so.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
It seems more likely that rich straight males make the news more. And particularly, VCs and tech CEOs make the news here on Slashdot more.
And there are a lot of business situations that are just social situations at work, and the appropriateness is different.
Therefore your claims are still insufficient as rebuttal to the post I made.
There is context,and that context is different in every situation, yet you want to make it the same context in this situation even when you don't know what the situation is.
For example, is it inappropriate for a woman to use sex to get VC funding? If so, and the VC thought that was what was going on, then the wrongness was from the woman first. If the woman then made it clear this was not the case, then it was a mistaken assumption. Much like the one you are making here. And if the VC continues to pretend that it is still a swap of sex for funding, then the VC is wrong. But if the woman accedes to the sexual advance until AFTER the deal has been struck, she is in the wrong.
There was a time where I came to slashdot for "non-CNN" headline news... What's happening ?
then we will have a problem.
Ask Barbara Hudson. He's a fag and has probably been raped before. He'd know all about it I guess ?
[At a faculty meeting about sexual harassment:] "...we were handed a printed list of 'guidelines.' Number one on the list was: 'Do not make unwanted sexual advances.' Someone demanded querulously from the back, 'But how do you know they're unwanted until you try?' (Okay, it was me.) Our leader, David, seemed oddly flummoxed by the question... --Laura Kipnis, "Men: Notes From An Ongoing Investigation" (Henry Hold, 2014)
How does a person know the advances are unwanted unless they first make the advances?
Did you ever stop to think that maybe his public apology was simply to save face? We live in an era where public opinion rules. Get accused of rape? Doesn't matter if you're found innocent in court, you may as well skip town and start over somewhere else, because everybody will think you're a rapist. Accused of child molestation? Again, doesn't matter if the courts find you innocent, you are permanently branded as a creep and you'll be lucky if you don't get beaten within inches of your life by an angry mob. The same applies in this case. There is a lot of publicity shining a light on him. We don't know if the allegations are true or not. Heck, even the media keeps referring to them as allegations and accusations, so how are you so completely and utterly sure he's guilty? His apologies never address specific instances, but are instead rather vaguely worded.
From the article you linked:
Maybe he did it, maybe he didn't. I don't know. You don't know. To pretend otherwise is to lie. Period.